I don't think so. The ozone layer can regenerate and actually has been doing so lately. Just lay off the CFCs, and we'll be ok, I think.
2006-10-29 18:07:20
·
answer #1
·
answered by red line 3
·
1⤊
1⤋
There is a chemical anti body, so to speak, in the form of a substance named Carb Absorb.
Filters made from this will remove all carbon dioxide.
Since it is in powder form its properties might be capable of being turned into a liquid then a gas?
If this is possible the we can repair the ozone layer quickly but that will not immediately cool down the extra heat we have already absorbed.
The world can reduce its carbon output by 200% just with industry alone without the light bulb scenario. Such as ---
No country is allowed an aircraft hub like Heath Row.
Generators must reduce their waste of heat as a first instance and improve the Power Factor of its output currently wasting 15% of its generated power.
Water companies should be made to accept a 1.0% leakage rate.
Manufacturing companies should not be allowed to ship products with air around them.
Producers of Electric motors should be made to comply to the same improved standard where the result would be a 100% efficiency improvement for domestic products.
(Thin out the copper usage and increase the profit while making the customer pay for an ongoing running cost)
Make companies use warehousing instead of supplying on demand. (50% saving on delivery costs hence trucks)
Consolidate and centralise data base computer systems and this will reduce that footprint by 70% in government use alone.
Think how many authorities have your details?
There is more and I haven't mention a light bulb anywhere.
2006-10-29 19:43:04
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
I don't understand why the UK Government has to resort to taxes to make people more aware of global warming and consuming the world's natural resources. Surely clear and concise information, starting in schools might help. Recycling should be encouraged by special refuse collection of paper and ensuring that stored provide facilities for collection of non-returnable bottles, aluminium drink cans and food tins.
It seems strange that tax proposals come at the same time as a plan to close local post offices. Surely this means that people will have to drive to the post office?
In the UK, those living in rural areas have to drive, or stay at home in the evenings because of appalling public transport. Also the cost of rail travel is prohibitive.
One is reminded of the parable of the beam and the mote. Maybe government practices on recycling and energy conservation should be investigated and the results published.
2006-10-29 18:21:46
·
answer #3
·
answered by cymry3jones 7
·
0⤊
1⤋
We are rapidly heading that way and will not prevent it unless China and India can be persuaded to halt their industrial and economic development programmes. They won't do that and it is unrealistic to expect them to - they would be denied all the benefits that the Western world has already enjoyed. That doesn't mean we shouldn't all do our bit to minimise carbon emissions but the emphasis now needs to be on preparing the planet for the inevitable climate changes. Building an Ark might be a good idea.
2006-10-29 18:20:15
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
the worrying thing is that the process is exponential, it will get worse over time and anything we do after a certain point will just be slowing it down a little.
if the methane deposits erupt also we will probably have less than 15 years as it will heat the world up more, leading to even more methane eruptions and so on, if we all stopped using airlines and cars right now, today, we would have a fighting chance, but the world is to bothered about its own problems to do anything.
EVACUATE!!! LOL
2006-10-29 19:55:55
·
answer #5
·
answered by Mr Gravy 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
If we haven't, I think we will. The effects of global warming are too slow and gradual for people to care. We are the frog in the warming pot. By the time it becomes a real problem, it will be too late. We have too many people who are too short-sighted or selfish to really change things. We won't prevent global warming, but we will adapt to it.
2006-10-29 18:13:25
·
answer #6
·
answered by Enrique C 3
·
0⤊
1⤋
Yes because by the time something desperate needs to be done, it will be too late, and there is too much corruption and bad management in the world leaders for them to come up with an actual solution to the problem, that will be implemented successfully.
2006-10-30 04:47:59
·
answer #7
·
answered by Sam P 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Global warming or not, we have to recognised we have limited resouces, until we address population control, I don't think we have much hope of decreasing global warming, until we decrease global consumption
2006-10-29 21:09:02
·
answer #8
·
answered by Breeze 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
To be Honest - Global Warming is such a joke! There is no need to worry about that at all! I would busy yourself in areas that are really important, & not wory about such things that don't exist!
2006-10-29 18:17:48
·
answer #9
·
answered by BlueSpider 3
·
1⤊
1⤋
30 years ago we were warned if we didnt change our ways it would soon be to late, giving the world only a few years grace. the world ignored that advice its now to late
2006-10-29 19:30:58
·
answer #10
·
answered by ? 7
·
0⤊
0⤋